hemel hempstead: waterhouse street stage 3 safety audit ... · 4.1 location – waterhouse...

Hemel Hempstead: Waterhouse Street

Stage 3 Safety Audit

1 File Ref: Gen241X Hemel Hempstead Audit Date: 3 July 2015

INTRODUCTION

This report contains the results of a Stage 3 Safety Audit carried out on the above scheme.

The Audit was carried out at the request of Mott MacDonald, Cambridge on behalf of

Hertfordshire County Council.

The Audit Team membership was as follows:-

Kevin Allen BEng (Hons), I Eng, MCIHT, MSoRSA Project Engineer

(Audit Team Leader) Network Analysis + Safety

Norfolk County Council

Julian Fonseka EngTech, MCIHT, MSoRSA Project Technician

(Audit Team Member) Network Analysis + Safety

Norfolk County Council

The Audit took place on site on 3 July 2015. The audit comprised an examination of the

previous Safety Audit submission and a site inspection by the Audit Leader and Audit Team

Member. The site inspection took place on 3 July 2015 at 11:00 and lasted around

60minutes. During the inspection the weather was fine and the road surface dry.

This report is presented based upon the checklist contained in Annex C of HD19/15. The

Auditors have examined and reported only on the road safety implications of the scheme as

presented and have not verified the compliance of the design to any other criteria, in

accordance with HD 19/15.




ITEMS RAISED AT PREVIOUS AUDIT

Safety issues raised at the previous Stage 1/2 audit (3 December 2013) remain a problem

and are referred to again in this report in paragraphs 1.1 and 4.1

ITEMS RAISED AT THIS STAGE 3 AUDIT

1.0 General

1.1 Location – Waterhouse Street

Problem – Speed Limit inappropriate to pedestrian/cyclist environment

The proposals to relocate the taxi rank and reduce on street parking have decreased

through traffic and potentially increased pedestrian crossing movements of

Waterhouse Street. A reduction in superfluous road markings has contributed to a

less traffic dominated environment and the existing 30mph speed limit is now

inappropriate. The Designer’s Response to the Stage 1/2 Safety Audit stated that

following adoption of DfT Guidance for Setting Local Speed Limits by Hertfordshire CC

an application would be made for a 20mph speed limit on Waterhouse Street. This

has not yet been implemented.

Recommendation –

To promote appropriate driver behaviour and improve the street environment for all

users, it is recommended that a 20mph speed limit is implemented on Waterhouse

Street.




1.2 Location – ‘No Waiting At Any Time’ restrictions on Waterhouse Street

Problem – Location of Green Badge Parking raises risk of conflict

The Waterhouse Street Scheme has seen the replacement of several disabled parking

bays with taxi ranks. Although some disabled bays are retained, there is a net loss

and during the site visit demand far exceeded capacity. As a consequence the

majority of the short sections of ‘No Waiting At Any Time’ restrictions were used by

Blue Badge Holders. Several of these are at locations which hinder access or raise

the possibility of conflict, such as adjacent to pedestrian or vehicular accesses, or

immediately next to bus stops. Conversely, long lengths of taxi rank were unoccupied.

Illegal and potentially unsafe parking was also observed by non-Blue Badge holders

on pedestrian crossing zig zags and at pedestrian accesses.

A.




B.

C.




Recommendation

It is understood that alternative disabled parking provision is located within the nearby

car parks. It is recommended that dialogue takes place with local disabled user

groups to highlight this and encourage alternative parking arrangements. It is also

recommended that enhanced parking enforcement is undertaken to deter any illegal

and unsafe parking.

During the site visit, the long lengths of empty taxi rank suggested an appropriate

balance of parking provision may not have been struck on Waterhouse Street. It is

accepted that at other times, such as Saturdays and around Christmas, that demand

for taxis is likely to be higher. Nevertheless, it would be prudent to review usage of the

various parking bays and restrictions after 6 months and consider re-allocation as

required.

2.0 Alignment

2.1 No comment

D.




3.0 Junctions

3.1 No comment

4.0 Non-motorised Users

4.1 Location – Waterhouse Street/Bridge Street

Problem – Inadequate crossing facilities increase risk of pedestrian/vehicle conflict

The existing pedestrian refuge island at the north end of the Waterhouse Street

scheme is narrow, at approximately 1.5m in width. This is a key pedestrian desire line

for access to The Marlowes from car parks and the head of the taxi rank. Site

observations indicate that the existing refuge is too small to accommodate groups of

pedestrians and there is an increased risk of pedestrians being struck by passing

traffic. The Designer’s response to the Stage 1/2 Safety Audit stated that analysis

would be undertaken to establish whether a larger island could be accommodated,

although this has not been confirmed.

E.




Recommendation

Provide a wider 1.8m pedestrian refuge and delineated contrasting surface, similar to

that on the Bridge Street arm of the mini roundabout to highlight the crossing. Two

rows of buff coloured tactile paving should be provided at the crossing point to aid

partially sighted users.

5.0 Signs, Lighting and Markings

5.1 No comment

6.0 Comments

Issues noted below are not necessarily safety issues. They relate either to wider

network implications, suitability of a particular design choice or lack of

information contained within the submission documents

6.1 No comments




7.0 Problem Location Plan

1.1 – Throughout Waterhouse Street

4.1 (Photo E)

1.2 (Photo B)

1.2 (Photo C)

1.2 (Photo A)

1.2 (Photo D)




AUDIT TEAM STATEMENT

We certify that this audit has been carried out in accordance with Norfolk County Council

Environment, Transport and Development Procedures.

Signed (ATL) Kevin Allen

Dated 8 July 2015

Signed ............…….... Julian Fonseka

Dated 08/07/2015




RESPONSE SHEET

Problem (para no.)

Agree/ Disagree

Reasons/Proposals

To:- Team Manager (Network Analysis + Safety): fao Kevin Allen

From....................................................................................................................................

Signed......................................………….Project Engineer Dated: .........................

Note: If producing your own version of this page please include SAFETY AUDIT FILE NO/DATE & ATL name

hemel hempstead: waterhouse street stage 3 safety audit ... · 4.1 location – waterhouse...

Documents